From: Sean Middleditch <elanthis@...>
Date: 2001-08-25T09:35:10+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:20333] Re: Backwards language

On 25 Aug 2001 08:32:39 +0900, Todd Gillespie wrote:
> Sean Middleditch <elanthis@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> : Ruby is way larger than what I want.  It has tons of features that are
> : awesome for application programming, which is great, but is a bit of
> : overkill for what would be done in an embedded script.  For example, an
> : eval() command requires that the entire parser and compiler be part of
> : the language runtime, when an eval() command should never ever be needed
> : - if it is, it's a flaw in the language or the code (that's my opinion,
> : that's all, please let's not start a flame war on this...)
> 
> Uhh... them's strong words, boy.
> 
> I was going to suggest that you try basing your design off Guile, the
> embedded Scheme environment, but it seems you have a few things to learn
> about language design.
> 

Not much of a schemer myself.  I have worked with guile a bit though,
and I like a lot of ideas.

And I definitely see that we disagree on the need of eval().  To be
honest, you are probably correct, but I've programmed for years in C/C++
(even BASIC when I was younger) and never needed it.  And I don't use it
in Ruby/Python/Perl either.

Perhaps you have some good examples that'd sway my opinion?  I'd much
rather have someone prove me wrong now than be wrong for a long time to
come.  ^,^  Again, though, please no flame wars, I like opinionated
debates so much more.

Thanks!

> Good luck!!